The Devil's Advocate: The Three Point Counter-Argument

Open-minded thinking requires considering the other side of the argument. The case for the proposed shopping center seems to have three parts:

1. There are no other sites for a big box store in the City of Clemson. This has also been stated as there are no other cost-prohibitive sites in the City.
   
2. A big box store will create generate tax revenue.
3. A big box store will create jobs.

All of these arguments require more than a few minutes of thought and a few sentences in response. However, I do not think that simply stating these arguments makes them right, or indicates that they have been rigorously analyzed and can be proven to be true.

Moreover, I do not think that any of these arguments makes Issaqueena Trail the right place for the proposed development, if for no other reason than a less intensive development would also generate tax revenue and create jobs. In fact, it may be the case that a less intensive development would create the same tax revenue after big box expenses and costs--such as retail sales lost elsewhere, decline in property values and taxes of homes across from the shopping center, new infrastructural costs like traffic engineering improvements, and so on--are figured into the calculation. Skepticism seems warranted.

Lastly, as far as jobs are concerned, won't the new development just shift the money around? Are people going to spend more, or just spend in a different place? Won't jobs simply be lost at the other Lowe's? And what about the jobs lost in and around Clemson? The local businesses like the small hardware stores and Southeast Garden Center will certainly be impacted and perhaps put out of business. So some jobs and livelihoods will almost certainly be lost to a "category killer" like a Lowe's.

The next time I hear someone assert that this project will create net jobs and tax revenue, and will improve our city "in the big picture," I would like to see their degree in economics, or a study by an independent economist that actually looks at the big picture. Until then, talk is cheap.